Wakilii

Attorney General v Byaruhanga and 12 Others (Civil Miscellaneous Application 21 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 927 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by Attorney General for leave to deposit compensation in court and for vacant possession of land compulsorily acquired for public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act
Decision
Application granted; Attorney General authorised to deposit compensation in court; vacant possession granted; eviction order to issue if Respondents do not vacate within one month

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that where government has compulsorily acquired land for public purpose in compliance with Art.26 of the Constitution and the Land Acquisition Act, and some project affected persons refuse compensation, others cannot be located, and some lack legal representatives, the Attorney General may deposit the compensation sum in court under s.6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act and obtain vacant possession to proceed with the public project.

Outcome

Application granted; Attorney General authorised to deposit compensation in court; vacant possession granted; eviction order to issue if Respondents do not vacate within one month

Facts

The Government of Uganda granted East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) Ltd a licence to construct a crude oil pipeline. On 29 November 2019, the Minister of Lands published S.I. No.105 of 2019 declaring land required for the project as needed for public purpose, including 24.97 acres in villages in Kikuube and Kakumiro Districts occupied by the Respondents. Government valuers assessed compensation for the affected landowners. Some Respondents refused to accept the assessed compensation claiming it was inadequate. Others, being beneficiaries of deceased estates, lacked legal representatives to receive payment. Some Respondents could not be located. The Attorney General applied to court for leave to deposit the compensation sum in court and for vacant possession to enable the EACOP project to proceed without further delay.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to deposit the Respondents' compensation sum in Court under s.6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act
  2. Whether the Applicant should be granted vacant possession of the compulsorily acquired land
  3. Whether eviction orders should issue against the Respondents

Orders

  • Applicant to deposit in Court the Respondents' compensation sum of UGX 160,070,843 for land measuring 24.97 acres in Kabeerya (Kikuube District) and ten villages in Kakumiro District forming part of land earmarked for the East African Crude Oil Pipeline project.
  • Applicant discharged from any liability arising out of any claim or action following this order.
  • Applicant granted vacant possession of the land described above for purposes of constructing the East African Crude Oil Pipeline and related activities.
  • Eviction order to issue if Respondents fail to vacate within one month from the date of this ruling.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Compulsory Acquisition — Deposit of Compensation in Court — Refusal to Accept Payment
Under s.6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act, where government has compulsorily acquired land for public purpose and a person awarded compensation refuses to accept payment, the High Court may, on application by the Attorney General, order payment to be made into court on such conditions as it thinks appropriate.
Compulsory Acquisition — Payment into Court — Inability to Locate Owners or Absence of Legal Representatives
Where circumstances render it inexpedient, difficult, or impossible to make payment of compensation in accordance with an assessment officer's award, including where project affected persons cannot be located or lack legal representatives to receive payment, the High Court may order the compensation sum to be deposited in court under s.6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act.
Compulsory Acquisition — Art.26 — Prompt Payment of Fair and Adequate Compensation
Art.26 of the Constitution safeguards against deprivation of property without consent and provides for prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation where property is compulsorily acquired for public use. Deposit of compensation in court under s.6(5) of the Land Acquisition Act where payment cannot be effected directly is consistent with the constitutional requirement for prompt payment.
Compulsory Acquisition — Vacant Possession — Public Interest
Where all legal requirements for compulsory acquisition of land for public purpose under the Constitution and the Land Acquisition Act have been met, and compensation has been assessed and deposited in court, the court may grant vacant possession to government to enable the public project to proceed, notwithstanding disputes over the adequacy of compensation or among project affected persons themselves.
Compulsory Land Acquisition — Disputes Not to Impede Public Projects
Courts are required to apply Art.26 of the Constitution bearing in mind that disputes arising from compulsory acquisition have the potential to cause delays in public works and become an impediment to the public interest. The logical need not to hamper implementation of a public project merely because of disputes among project affected persons or disputes challenging the assessed award must be considered.

Legislation cited (11)

Cases cited (2)

  • Attorney General v Etot Paul Peter and Others (Civil Appeal No. 144 of 2018)
  • Attorney General v Kisembo Rugadya and 41 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Attorney General v Byaruhanga and 12 Others (Civil Miscellaneous Application 21 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 927 (20 September 2024)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.